Legal Opinion
Huntington Mining Holdings, Inc. v. Cottontail Plaza, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 1, 1983PublishedCited by 88 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Though defendant seller’s anticipatory breach of contract relieved plaintiff purchaser of its obligation to tender performance, this did not discharge plaintiff’s obligation to show that it was ready and able to perform its own contractual undertakings on the closing date, in order to secure specific performance. (Stawski v Epstein, 67 AD2d 681; Friederang v Aldo Co., 199 App Div 127.) Plaintiff insists that, while it lacked its own funds to purchase the property on the scheduled closing date, it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stawski v. EpsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Friederang v. Ruth Aldo Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
3Cited by88 opinions
- Zev v. MermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Towers Charter & Marine Corporation, Counter-Defendant v. Cadillac Insurance Company, Counter-Plaintiff v. Steven Hoffenberg, Additional on the Counterclaim-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- ADC Orange, Inc. v. Coyote Acres, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2006
- 3M Holding Corp. v. WagnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Madison Investments, Inc. v. Cohoes AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.